With bad news after bad news when it comes to consumer rights in relation to software and copyright, it's always refreshing to see that there are still people in high places who aren't yet bought by big content. Late last week, a major battle was won for consumer rights in Switzerland: Switzerland's Federal Supreme Court has ruled that IP addresses are personal information, and therefore, fall under the country's strict privacy laws, and may not be used by anti-piracy companies.

What you're completely ignoring in Thom's argument is that he does NOT support piracy and does not seek to put indies out of a job.

Allowing p2p downloading is the same as supporting piracy. You can't restrict piracy by only going after uploaders since files can be kept offshore.

and trust me when educated people read you they get what you are trying to do (you actually cannot form a comment without going back to that).

What does this have to do with education? Economists are educated people and it is accepted by economists the strong copyright laws are significantly beneficial to technological progress. So anyone who supports piracy is against one of the commonly accepted doctrines of modern economics.

People just have to adapt and suck it up. This is a new millenium. I, and billions others, are more than willing to

Do you deny that certain types of software cannot be produced in parts of Asia because the piracy rates are too high?

Like others your answer is "figure it out" but you don't provide a viable alternative to intellectual property laws. Many types of digital content requires special protection due to the fact that the capital investment is entirely in the development, not the reproduction. This is also true for patents that take years to develop but can be implemented and duplicated immediately. Without intellectual property laws you kill off incentive and this is well established. And what would be the benefit? So pirates can avoid paying for software and movies?

We've seen what happens when piracy is allowed. Any modern economist will laugh in your face if you claim that allowing unlimited reproduction of intellectual property will not restrict technological growth.